Environmental News, Articles & Information | Global Warming News | EcoWorld

Concentrating people into high-density living arrangements is a central premise of the “smart growth” movement. But the nature of these high density communities is what separates the truly smart developments from the merely smart.

Green buildings are designed, essentially, to require no more energy and water inputs than they are able to generate using on-site systems. A green building is also designed, of course, to use non-toxic, sustainable materials, and to recycle or 100% treat all of its waste. But green buildings may also be awe-inspiring feats of architecture, and fantastic spaces for humans to work, live, and congregate.

Image: Montana State Univ.

A mesmerizing example of such a green building showed up in the December 2006 issue of The Atlantic magazine, in a detailed illustration that consumes nearly the entire space of a two-page advertisement. This ad, placed by United Technologies, and accompanied by the phrase “Imagine that. You can do well in the world without hurting it,” there is a cross-sectional illustration of building perhaps ten stories in height that is “the first zero net energy building.”

On parts of the roof and on sections of passive solar sunshades are arrays of photovoltaics that are totally integrated into the surfaces.

Designed to operate inside ducts with barely visible intakes, high-tech wind-turbines also operate, silently, to generate additional electricity. Ultra high energy-efficient elevators speed people and cargo throughout the levels. Underground is a cistern, to collect all of the building’s runoff from rainfall. Rooftops are covered in turf including plants and ponds, with a water reclamation system integrated into the landscaping.

Between cantilevered beams of steel and composite, this large green building has floor-to-ceiling “electro-chromic” windows that automatically increase their tint depending on the degree of sunlight. These windows may also be photovoltaic. Various levels of the building have extra-high ceilings, as high as twenty feet. Workspaces and residences are placed throughout the building, and a giant central atrium ensures ample air circulation throughout the building.

Along with rainwater cisterns that can either draw from or supply municipal pipes, beneath the building are parking areas and utility areas including electrical storage units that use fuel cells or batteries. The climate and energy functions of the building are completely automated, and controllable from anywhere in the world using a cell phone.

Sunlight provides energy, rain provides water, nothing pollutes, there is no “urban heat island” effect, and people live in enjoyable and inspiring spaces in very high proximity to each other. Green buildings make humanity’s footprint smaller on the earth, and they can also make the life within the print a better life than ever.

In our last post, “Dams & Greenhouse Gas,” we took the International Rivers Network to task for putting out a study that claimed dams are a “significant global source of greenhouse gasses.” Because if you dug into the underlying facts, the estimated contribution greenhouse gasses make to total anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a whopping .7% (seven-tenths of one percent).

There are many problems with dams, and greenhouse gas emissions (itself a topic not beyond debate) are not one of them. For a serious discussion of the problems with dams, we turn to the Property and Environment Research Center, who recently published an essay by James Workman entitled “Deadbeat Dams.” Workman is succinct and comprehensive in his descriptions of why dams have outlived their usefulness: “antiquated dams have a lot going against them: seismic shifts shake them from below; compound water pressures scour them from behind; sediment fills reservoirs; evaporation drinks more than people; and invasive species choke intake and out flow.” Let’s not forget all those salmon…

Not only does Workman explain that most dams have a useful life and afterwards can cause more harm than good, he presents a practical way to get rid of obsolete dams: “businesses seek out credits generated by third-party projects for environmental services in advance of their proposed development—and pay handsomely for them…the average obsolete dam may be worth far more broken up than left intact; the sum of its removed parts are worth more than the integrated whole. Busting the dam could release a net gain in legitimate, measurable economic value, which can be brought to market and sold to willing buyers.”

Workman estimates there are 79,000 dams in the United States, and that 85% of these dams are no longer providing economic benefits. Meanwhile there are developers throughout the USA who are trying to provide new industrial, commercial and residential facilities for a country whose population just topped 300 million and grows by over 3 million per year. All of them are required to mitigate whatever land and habitat their developments encroach upon, usually by ratios well beyond one-to-one.

Another noteworthy point regarding dams is the value of an alternative to mega-dams, which is to build small check dams. These dams catch seasonal flows and divert the water to temporary basins where they refill aquifiers. This is a terrific way to recharge the water tables, particularly in areas where wells for crop irrigation have drawn underground water reserves to dangerously low levels. Here are some references, including links to reports on communities in India who have successfully built check dams:

Check Dams in Utility canyon running into Bay of Bengal

Check Dams and Sustainable LivelyhoodsCheck Dam through Shramdan

For more about water issues in India, read our feature “India’s Water Future.”

Human Development Report 2006
Read the section on water harvesting; pages 195-197

Here we go again. The International Rivers Network, based in Berkeley, California, an organization with some incredibly great ideas, now reports that dams (and the reservoirs behind them) cause greenhouse gas emissions. Courtesy of the IRN, read “Fizzy Science: Loosening the Hydro Industry’s Grip on Reservoir Greenhouse Gas Emissions Research.” This report (click here for full report), of course, damns dams, and demonizes yet another industry – this time those evil people who build devices to store water for irrigation, control flooding, and generate electricity for terrible things like stoves.

Aswan High Dam

Before we go any further, let’s be clear about one thing; this is almost certainly less than meets the eye, and even if it isn’t so what? CO2 as a boogyman seems to have become the fulcrum upon which pivots all environmentalist logic and reason. But are we so sure CO2 emissions are bad? There is evidence to support theories that the more atmospheric CO2 concentrations increase, the less warming impact occurs per additional unit of CO2. This would mean our climate may have already seen the biggest effects of increasing CO2 emissions. For much more on this, read our “Global Warming” posts.

Remember when nuclear power plants were deemed to cause dangerous levels of CO2 emissions? This was determined based on the amount of CO2 that is emitted when pouring cement. Apparently nuclear power stations require prodigious amounts of cement. But shortly after this press release went out, gobbled up as usual by mainstream media, a perspicacious blogger named Tim Worstall penned a gleeful comparison wherein he demonstrated that more cement per megawatt is required when installing windmills than when installing nuclear power stations. Others were also chiming in. Thank you hive-mind. And hence nuclear power is again touted as alternative energy by many environmentalists.

Back to our new problem of dams and greenhouse gasses, taking a look at the facts indicates scant evidence for alarm. Hitting its stride, the IRN piece states as follows: “available evidence strongly suggests that reservoirs are a significant global source of greenhouse gases.” They back this up with the following footnote: “reservoirs worldwide release 1,000 million tons CO₂ annually (4% of CO₂ from other known anthropogenic sources).

Even if this statement is completely true, that 4% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions come from dams and reservoirs, so what? Does this mean the benefits of dams – irrigation, flood protection, and renewable electricity, are not worth putting out 4% of anthropogenic CO2? Per gigawatt-year (or quadrillion BTU’s), hydroelectric power would still be far more greenhouse gas efficient than, say, coal or natural gas.

That’s not the half of it, however. In the remainder of the same footnote, IRN discloses the following: “These estimates are based on a calculation of 1.5 million km² global reservoir area. This calculation is likely an overestimate. A more recent analysis estimates that reservoirs cover a global area of 260,000 km².”

This means IRN is saying the information they just gave you – that reservoirs cause 4% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions – is overestimated by a factor of 5.8 times! IRN’s revised estimate of global reservoir area isn’t 1,500,000 square kilometers, the figure they used to calculate their 1.0 million ton estimate of annual CO2 emissions from reservoirs. Rather IRN acknowledges the global reservoir area is more likely only 260,000 square kilometers, which equates to 176,000 tons of CO2 per year, or .7% (seven-tenths of one percent) of anthropogenic CO2 emissions per year.

Needless to say, if dams only emit .7% of anthropogenic CO2, which itself is only 3% of all CO2 global emissions (the rest come from mother nature), they are not a factor. To use the CO2 emissions of dams and reservoirs as a reason we must demolish them, and demonize the hydroelectric power industry to boot, is not useful information, it’s propaganda.

The International Rivers Network might instead have on their website the letter that one of their members, Peter Bosshard wrote to the New Yorker (published in their December 4th, 2006 issue). Instead of brandishing the CO2 demon to scare us into destroying existing dams, he advocates an alternative to construction of new dams. Listen to this great idea:

“The 2006 Human Development Report on water presents an alternative to large dams. It estimates that, with an initial investment of seven billion dollars, extending small check dams across India’s rain-fed farming areas could quintuple the value of the country’s monsoon crop from thirty-six billion dollars a year to a hundred and eighty billion. Such an approach would not only protect rivers and the groundwater table; it would also create jobs and give the poor the means to buy the food they produce.” More on this, if you please.

This week the Los Angeles Auto Show had its 100th annual exhibition at the Los Angeles Convention Center. In his keynote address on 11-29, Rick Wagoner, the Chairman and CEO of General Motors, congratulated the producers when he said “you have ‘arrived’ this year as one of the industry’s top international shows.”

This is more true than the distinguished Mr. Wagoner may realize. California is the home of automotive industry newcomers Tesla Motors in the Silicon Valley, and Phoenix Motorcars in California’s southland. Tesla Motors is noteworthy because they have the backing of some of the wealthiest, smartest venture capitalists the Silicon Valley ever spawned, and they are using the already commoditized lithium ion batteries used in laptops, with extremely high energy densities, to power their 100% battery powered Tesla Roadster. Phoenix Motorcars is interesting because they have a supplier agreement with Altair Technologies, who claim they have a next-generation “nano-titanate” lithium ion battery that has faster recharging times and greatly reduced problems with heat management. Could the automotive industry’s center of gravity be shifting from Detroit to California?

What we really were looking for when listening to the GM Chairman Wagoner deliver his keynote in Los Angeles was any indication that GM was going to deliver a series hybrid car, as rumor has it – read “The Series Hybrid Car is Here.”

In Wagoner’s keynote (read text here) he mentioned flex-fuel vehicles, E-85 gasoline, new hybrid vehicle roll-outs, even a plug-in hybrid! We like plug-ins, even now using nickel metal hydride batteries, because some of us only have 10-20 mile commutes, which means we can plug our hybrid cars into a wall socket each night and spend $.02 per mile using the electricity from the grid, instead of triple that cost when we charge our cars batteries using on-board gasoline. Read “Electric Car Cost per Mile” or “The 100% Battery Powered Car” for charts explaining the cost-per-mile savings of using grid electricity vs. gasoline.

We are extremely excited about series hybrid cars, because in this design the onboard gasoline engine is hooked only to an electric generator. This means it can operate at a constant RPM, which means it can attain up to 40% efficiency, far, far more than it can achieve when hooked to a drivetrain with constantly varying RPM and torque requirements. The efficiencies getting power from a generator through a battery pack and into an electric traction motor are surprisingly high. We believe the serial hybrid is potentially more fuel efficient than today’s parallel hybrids, and we believe they are far, far less complex to build and maintain.

We were told, off the record, by a GM spokesperson only two days ago that GM is definitely going to have a serial hybrid concept car early next year. But the best we got on 11-29-2006 from Chairman Wagoner is the following: “GM is committed to the development of electrically driven vehicles that will help improve energy diversity, and minimize the automobile’s impact on the environment… and, we’ll follow today’s announcements with additional announcements during the auto show season… including Detroit, in about six weeks.” That’s an enticing tidbit.

GM has gotten a bum rap by environmentalists. GM has tried everything; the experimental EV-1, sixteen generations of internally designed fuel cells, hybrids, flex-fuel; now plug-in hybrids. But if they don’t come through (as they have hinted so far they will) with a serial hybrid car, which is the closest thing yet to a 100% battery powered car and eminently practical, someone in California is going to do it instead, and the automotive world’s center of gravity will shift westward…

Egypt, an ancient land along the fertile Nile, awakens to solar technology. Why not build solar/fossil fuel hybrid-design power plants?

Since 1967, up to 2.1 gigawatts of electricity has been generated from the Aswan High Dam. How soon will solar power match and exceed this prodigious output?

To ensure adequate provision of electricity, the Egyptian Electricity Holding Company now projects requiring on average about 1,500 MW of new capacity each year.

To ensure adequate provision of electricity, the Egyptian Electricity Holding Company (EEHC) — a near-monopolist responsible for generation, transmission and distribution of electricity — now projects requiring on average about 1,500 MW of new capacity each year. The government says that renewable energy projects should play a part in Egypt’s generation plan. Indeed, 145 MW of wind-turbines have already been installed and are operational, performing well at an average capacity factor of 42%.

Egypt’s fast growing demand for electricity requires significant investment in generation capacity each year (the increase in demand for electricity in Egypt averaged about 7% during 1997/98-2003/04 and is expected to remain in the 6%-7% range over the next 10 years). Installed capacity of electric power was 18,119 MW in 2003/04, of which 84% comprised thermal power (8% of which is provided by the private sector through 3 Independent Power Producers, IPPs). The remaining capacity was attributed to hydropower (15%) and wind (1%). Peak load reached 14,735 MW, and about 90% of the thermal power production was based on natural gas. Initiatives are underway to better understand customer consumption patterns and loads to ultimately implement demand-side management measures to reduce the overall consumption and the growth in demand.

World Bank assistance is being provided to enhance energy efficiency in the power sector under the El Tebbin Power Project. This covers pricing as well as load management planning, The Government’s strategy is to continue to implement gas fired power plants, with a long-term view to increase the share of combined cycle gas turbine technology in the generation mix. In addition, the Government has a target of meeting 3% of its primary energy needs from renewable energy sources by 2010. The New and Renewable Energy Authority (NREA) has the responsibility to develop renewable resources in Egypt and implement the government’s strategy on renewable energy. Until 2001, most of NREA’s activities have been in the research and development field, and since then its activities have increasingly turned to the production of renewable energy.

The New & Renewable Energy Authority’s strategy is to capitalize on Egypt’s abundant wind and solar natural resources to meet the renewable energy target set by the Government. For this purpose it plans to install an additional 400 MW of wind by 2010 and considers the construction of the proposed Solar Thermal Hybrid Power Plant (151 MW) a key development towards improving and diversifying its institutional and technical capacity in the area of renewable energy.

The primary objective of the new World Bank-funded project is to increase the share of solar-based power in the Egyptian generation mix thereby contributing to the Government’s aim of diversifying power production. The key performance indicators for the development objectives of the project include:

-Total electricity generated from solar field (GWh/year)

-Solar output as a percentage of total energy produced by the hybrid plant.

-Total electricity generated from the ISCC power plant (GWh/year)

The global impact is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from anthropogenic sources by increasing the market share of low greenhouse gas emitting technologies.

The project will finance the construction of an Integrated Solar Combined Cycle (ISCC) power plant, to be located in Kureimat, about 95 km south of Cairo, on the eastern side of the river Nile.

The main innovation of an ISCC plant is the integration of steam generated by solar energy into a combined cycle power plant, which will require a larger steam turbine to generate electrical energy from the additional solar-generated steam.

Supplying the fossil fuel, Egypt’s EGAS Co.

The plant will have a capacity of about 150 MW, combining a conventional fossil fuel portion of about 120 MW and an input from solar sources of about 30 MW. When own consumption of 5.3 MW is deducted, the net overall plant capacity becomes 145.7 MW. The total net energy produced by the plant is expected to be 984 GWh per year, which includes the solar contribution of 64.5 GWh per year. This corresponds to a solar share of 6.6% percent of the total annual energy produced by the plant operating at a full load. The primary fuel for the conventional fossil fuel portion will be natural gas supplied at the site by the Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company.

The project will be implemented through the following components whose costs are estimated inclusive of import taxes on equipment and contingencies:

Component 1: The design, construction and operation of the proposed Integrated Solar Combined Cycle Plant include two sub-components:

–The solar portion of the power plant will include one contract for engineering, procurement, construction, testing, commissioning and five years operation and maintenance (O&M).

–The Combined Cycle portion of the plant will include one contract for the EPC aspect of the power plant financed by JBIC and a one 5 year O&M contract financed by NREA.

Component 2: Comprises the consulting contract to provide construction management services during the construction, testing and operation of the plant.

Component 3: Comprises the Environmental and Social Impact management component to be financed by NREA.

The project’s financing will be structured in this fashion (USD – Millions:

Government of Egypt, $59.12

World Bank’s Global Environment Facility $50.00

Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), $92.33

Total Financing, $201.45

The Government of Egypt’s commitment to renewable energy resource development is strong as evidenced by its declared objective of diversifying energy sources, including having 3% of installed capacity represented by renewable energy by 2010 and the establishment of the “petroleum fund” which provides economic incentive to renewable energy producers.

Most of the higher capital cost of the hybrid plant will be offset by the World Bank Global Environment Facility (GEF) incremental cost grant, Furthermore, NREA has declared its willingness to finance incremental cost above US$50 million, recognizing the cap on GEF grant support to the project.

Finally, the integration of the solar field with a CCGT ensures that the hybrid will provide the required electricity contribution to the system regardless of solar radiation conditions. For these reasons, the hybrid power plant is expected to operate sustainably as an integral part of the Egyptian power system. The incentive structure for the solar and CCGT O&M operators will ensure efficient operation of the plant and optimal design for integration of the solar thermal with the gas-fired plant and maximize solar output from the plant when in operation.

NREA has gained significant experience in designing and implementing wind energy projects with international loan and grant financing. The lessons drawn from this experience include: the importance of transparent and well-managed competitive bidding processes, which have contributed to attracting the interest and comfort of major international suppliers of wind technology with business transactions in Egypt.

Furthermore, through the development of these projects, NREA has operated under Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with Egyptian Electricity Holding Co. and has gained significant experience in structuring and negotiating such agreements. This experience will be very useful for the proposed project, in which a PPA will need to be put in place as well as a Gas Purchase Agreement (GPA).

No large-scale solar thermal power plants have been built in developing countries to date, however several small-scale projects are under construction around the world. At the moment, GEF-supported projects are also in preparation in Mexico and Morocco. The most significant solar thermal installations are in California where 354 MW of parabolic troughs, with back-up gas fired steam boilers have been generating electricity and selling it to the utility since the 1980s.

California’s Kramer Junction Power Station uses arrays of parabolic troughs with natural gas fueled backup boilers

To meet the cost reduction objective of the project, it will be necessary to move beyond the trough/backup boiler design upon which the California plant is based. The purpose is to permit higher thermal efficiencies, improve the dispatchability of the plant and to encourage greater competition in the design and supply of equipment. Such a plant would be more attractive to utilities, thus increasing the market size.

The political system in Egypt can be characterized by stability and continuity. A comprehensive reform program was adopted in 2004 when significant change took place in the cabinet and several new officials were appointed to key ministerial positions. This new government has made economic reform its key objective, notably in areas such as finance, investment, trade and industry. It has also stated its keen interest in expanding public-private partnerships and undertaking public sector reforms aimed at enhancing the provision of public goods and services, including physical and social infrastructure. The latter includes the power sector.

The investment needs in infrastructure remain substantial. It is estimated that approximately 4-6% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) needs to be invested annually in infrastructure sectors in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region to satisfy new investment requirements as well as maintenance and replacement spending. The decline in investment in the MENA region, including in Egypt, is reported to have compromised the infrastructure base, which is further challenged by the high growth in demand for modern infrastructure services.

About the Author: Gordon Feller is the CEO of Urban Age Institute (www.UrbanAge.org). During the past twenty years he has authored more than 500 magazine articles, journal articles or newspaper articles on the profound changes underway in politics, economics, and ecology – with a special emphasis on sustainable development. Gordon is the editor of Urban Age Magazine, a unique quarterly which serves as a global resource and which was founded in 1990. He can be reached at GordonFeller@UrbanAge.org and he is available for speaking to your organization about the issues raised in this and his other numerous articles published in EcoWorld.

First Solar, the first company to set up volume production of thin-film photovoltaics, has just gone public, and the market loves them. According to Morningstar, by mid-day on Monday 11-20, First Solar’s stock (FSLR) has rallied 24% after their IPO on Friday 11-17.

While the U.S. has fallen behind in production of crystalline silicon photovoltaics, it appears the U.S. manufacturers are poised to take the lead in worldwide thin film photovoltaic production.

The photovoltaic tidal wave gathers… Photo: DayStar Technologies

Along with First Solar, U.S. companies already shipping thin film photovoltaics include DayStar Technologies, and Unisolar. Joining them soon are silicon valley debuts Nanosolar and Miasole, who both have thin film manufacturing lines under construction.

If the forecast manufacturing levels of just these five U.S. companies are to be believed, by early 2008 they are going to be producing nearly 1.0 gigawatts of photovoltaics per year, and that is just the beginning.

This compares to the entire world production of photovoltaics in 2005 totalling only 1.6 gigawatts, and thin film only accounted for about 100 megawatts of that total. Photovoltaic manufacturing using both conventional means, using silicon ingots, and using thin film technology, is about to explode.

For photovoltaics to contribute significantly to global energy production, sustained exponential growth is necessary. But this appears possible, given the number of credible entrants into the thin film photovoltaic market, and the apparent ability of these companies to quickly establish production lines that within 18 months could easily double the manufacturing output of photovoltaics worldwide.

Moreover, the supply and the cost of raw materials necessary to manufacture thin film photovoltaics does not appear to be a constraint, as it is with with those relying on crystalline silicon. As a result, thin film photovoltaics are cheap and getting cheaper. In First Solar’s S-1 Statement, filed prior to their IPO, they state “During the three months ended September 30, 2006, we produced approximately 18MW of solar modules at a manufacturing cost per Watt of $1.42.” This cost includes about $.07 for expensed stock options, which the accountants among us know is a theoretical cost at best.

First Solar claims they could soon be the first company to manufacture photovoltaics at a cost that would be competitive with conventional electricity, which would require their costs to get down to around $.75 per watt. They are well on their way, and if the claims of newcomers such as Nanosolar come to fruition, they won’t be alone.

There are many obstacles to creating an energy future reliant on hydrogen, but it is a mistake to think the hydrogen future must include fuel cells. In our posts critical of the hydrogen lobby we have oversimplified that point, because hydrogen can be used as fuel for an internal combustion engine. And even when hydrogen combusts, it is still absolutely pollution free, emitting only water vapor.

When we participated in California’s hydrogen highway planning sessions a few years ago, there was an obvious disconnect between what the hydrogen zealots wanted, and what the industry engineers claimed was feasible. I distinctly remember representatives from Ford and Toyota patiently trying to explain how easy it would be to just convert a vehicle to run on hydrogen – keeping the internal combustion engine.

Today a BBC report entitled “BMW’s Hydrogen Car” describes the experience writer Jorn Madslien has as he tools along the autobahn north of Berlin in a prototype that delivers over 300 horsepower. By sticking with an internal combustion engine, BMW is bucking the trend, and will undoubtedly deliver affordable hydrogen-powered cars way, way ahead of the pack. Designing vehicles with onboard fuel cells is still very problematic, and not just because of their expensive raw materials.

None of this means the hydrogen future is going to be easy, or will ever occupy more than a niche in tomorrow’s energy economy. We like hydrogen because it can be produced using nothing more than electricity and water, and you can burn it with no pollution. We believe that technology is about to deliver a photovoltaic revolution, so being able to produce vast quantities of “green” hydrogen is not a far fetched notion. But storage and distribution of hydrogen remains an extremely challenging obstacle.

On board BMW’s hydrogen car, for example, is a tank of liquified hydrogen. This requires a refrigeration system, as well as the necessity to bleed off a small percentage of the liquified hydrogen as gas each hour. Absent a recapturing device, this means such a vehicle could never be parked in an enclosed environment such as a parking garage, since the hydrogen gas would collect and could cause a catastrophic explosion.

On a larger scale, hydrogen storage is even more problematic. At any given moment, there are well over 400 million barrels of gasoline (a five day supply) refined and working through the worldwide storage and distribution infrastructure. How on earth are we going to store that much energy in the form of hydrogen? In practical terms, this would require ultra-cold liquification, or containment in 10,000 PSI pressure vessels. By contrast, natural gas only requires pressure vessels at 300 PSI. Storing hydrogen would require a containment vessel literally 30 times as strong as natural gas. Gasoline, of course, simply requires a tank.

So if you take away the fuel cell and go with internal combustion, and if you assume we are on the verge of having abundant electricity via photovoltaics, then hydrogen looks a lot better. But because of the remaining storage and distribution challenges, replacing petroleum with hydrogen is going to take creativity, technological breakthroughs, and an investment in infrastructure we can scarcely imagine. My money is still on batteries.

Since 1958, the observatory at Mauna Loa has tracked concentrations of atmospheric CO2 (Photo: NOAA)

What’s up there? A weather balloon ascends to add another piece to the puzzle. (Photo: NOAA)

The facts are in the figures – and the figures don’t support the ex-vice president’s dire predictions about global warming

According to Al Gore, if we don’t take action to prevent global warming over the next 10 years, we will have pushed the earth into a climatic and environmental tailspin that will by the end of the century have caused sea levels to rise; ice caps to melt; and hurricanes, droughts, and floods to increase in both strength and frequency. And that’s just the beginning. Gore and others who warn of global warming – including organizations such as the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control (IPCC) – predict that all of these catastrophes will occur as a result of rapidly rising global temperatures caused primarily by emissions of man-made carbon dioxide (CO2).

With Gore’s views front and center via his new book and documentary film An Inconvenient Truth, it’s time to take a closer look at the global warming/greenhouse gas prognostications – particularly when one considers the massive amounts of money governments are committing to solving the perceived problem. Consider this as you think about the statistics revealed in this article: The Kyoto Accord is anticipated to cost the participating Western nations a whopping 2% of their GDP per year. Is it worth it?

Scientific data indicates that the earth has warmed by approximately 0.8 degrees Celsius over the last century, and that man-made CO2 has contributed to global warming since World War II. Meanwhile, the net earth warming since World War II has been 0.4 C. The debate among experts boils down to the following issues: How much global warming occurs naturally, and how much can be attributed to human inflicted change? And how much effect to CO2 gases – by themselves – have on temperature increases and other predicted climate change?

Proponents of global warming theories predict that temperatures will rise 5.8 C (IPCC, 2001) or more this century. Let’s take a closer look. For the earth to experience a growing greenhouse effect and linear rising temperatures, CO2 levels must increase exponentially. If CO2 levels increase only linearly, the increase in temperature flattens out. Water vapor, the main greenhouse gas, acts in the same way. Well, guess what? CO2 emissions have been increasing at exponential rates since World War II, fueling the warnings of those pointing to the dangers of climate change.

ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONCENTRATIONS SINCE 1958 – PARTS PER MILLION

CO2 in our atmosphere has increased from around 315 PPM in 1958 to about 370 PPM today. Note the annual drop of 5-10 PPM caused during spring and summer in the vast forests of the northern hemisphere. (Source: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center)

Digging a little deeper, though, a study of the CO2 atmospheric content data from the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii reveals that since the late 1970′s – the start of the modern-day energy conservation movement – CO2 levels have only increased linearly (at approximately 1.5 ppm per year).

What’s more, since the late 1970′s, the global temperature has been increasing at a constant rate of 0.17 C per decade. Add to this information data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration showing that the annual per-capital CO2 global emissions rate has flattened out since the early 1980s, and you begin to see the problem: Based on these facts, no one can predict exponential increases in man-made CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. And if there’s no exponential increase in CO2, there can be no global warming.

Still need convincing? Consider these facts: Per GDP dollar, we’re currently using only 60% of the energy we used in 1980. In addition, recent upper-atmosphere weather balloon and satellite temperature measurements show no net upper atmosphere warming since 1970. There are also plenty of studies predicting that warming in the next 50 years will amount to less than 1.0 C. In fact, even most climate models referred to in the IPCC study from 2001 predict warming to be around their low value of 1.4 C.

So how does Gore come to his conclusions? In his movie, he points to a global temperature model reflecting 1,000 years of temperature history to support his thesis. The graph shows a flat temperature range for 900 years and a dramatic rise over the last 100 years. Since human-produced greenhouse emissions have only existed since the last century, Gore deduces, they must be the reason for the warming during that same period. This graph, however, is controversial for a couple of reasons: 1) Many believe it should show temperature fluctuations starting earlier in the last millennia; and 2) it depends solely on tree-ring analysis, which provides accurate documentation of temperature variances over decade-long periods but is far less accurate for long-term variance.

THE ATLANTIC MULTIDECADAL OSCILLATION (AMO)

If historical trends hold, by around 2025, sea surface temperatures will decline again, and Atlantic hurricanes will diminish in intensity. (Source: NOAA)

Various studies show that mean global temperatures rose and fell long before man-made greenhouse gases existed. The sun’s energy is the main determinant for the earth’s varying temperature; earth axis rotation and other systemic cycles also have an effect. Man, in contrast, has a minor effect.

Take hurricanes: Gore believes that the recent increase in hurricanes is a result of human activity and the global warming that has resulted. But the recent upsurge in hurricanes is consistent with observed trends since 1850.

The main forcing function for hurricane formation is the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). Every 25 to 40 years, the warm Gulf waters and the Caribbean currents oscillate northward or southward to or from the upper Atlantic Ocean. Sure enough, observed hurricane activity and intensity since 1850 have increased and decreased in tandem with this oscillation. In contrast, recent studies show that increased sea surface temperatures have only added to storm intensity by a couple of percentage points.

Or take Mr. Gore’s prediction that sea levels will rise 20 feet by the end of this century. For the last few thousand years, the sea level has risen at a steady rate of 1.5 mm per year. The 6 inch increase in sea level during the last century is consistent with that rate. In addition, Greenland ice levels have been constant over the last few decades as well. While it’s true that ice cleaving and ice flow rates at the coast have increased in recent years, these shifts are due to the AMO – and will abate once the AMO oscillates southward. What the global warming theorists fail to mention in their findings is that the increased ice and snow pack on Greenland is balancing out the coastal melting. And what’s creating the increased ice and snow pack? Warmer sea surface temperatures: The increased temperatures create moisture, which in turn causes additional snowfall.

Is it global warming, or deforestation, that shrinks the glacier? Mt. Kilimanjaro from outer space. (Photo: NASA)

Similar observations have been made in the Antarctic. Although proponents of the global warming theory refer to a study showing reduced ice content at the tip of one peninsula, they ignore the snowfall data from several Antarctic continental stations showing increasing ice packs from the extra sea moisture.

Finally, climate data indicates that the ice cap on Tanzania’s Mt. Kilimanjaro depends on localized temperature-independent precipitation levels. Based on simple observations of the melt rate on Mt. Kilimanjaro, we can see that ice was actually melting at a higher rate early last century than it is today because of less precipitation.

Given this data, one has to question the motives of climate change theory proponents: Could they be after the $4 billion in government grants available to scientists studying climate change? With policies such as the Kyoto Accord’s CO2 emission control goal offering no apparent discernible temperature reduction, it’s imperative that a debate on global warming ensue.

This article was originally published in AlwaysOn Magazine, and is republished with permission.

Related Feature Reports:

• Global Warming Facts
• Climate Catastrophe
• Global Warming

Related Editorial Commentary:

• Global Warming Postulate
• Global Warming Litigation
• Brazilian vs. Californian Ethanol
• Greenland’s Ice Melting Slowly
• Filthy Air With Less CO2
• Additional Facts and Commentary on Global Warming

Today’s San Francisco Chronicle ran an article that fairly screams for commentary. In the story entitled “Honda Rolls Out the Future – A Car Powered by Hydrogen,” the reporter informs us of the following “But by one particular yardstick, the car is special — it doesn’t run on fossil fuel. Instead, a fuel cell car uses hydrogen.” That’s in paragraph two. A little further down, in paragraph nine, the truth comes out “The hydrogen can be refined from a number of sources, including coal, natural gas and methane.” Oops.

Further still in this report, reality comes out in a quote from David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington D.C., who says “We have to get a fuel cell vehicle that is durable and cheap enough,” Friedman said, “and make sure the hydrogen is clean enough. No one will cheer if, at the end of the day, we make all our hydrogen from coal and melt the planet.” Amen, Mr. Friedman.

At the end of the story comes a final quote, one that bears challenging “As for the economics, Honda Vice President Ben Knight said a fuel cell car can get the equivalent of a gasoline-powered car’s 65 miles per gallon. An FCX filled with 8.8 pounds of hydrogen can go about 270 miles, he said.”

This is only true if the car is fueled with hydrogen derived from fossil fuel. If instead the car uses “green” hydrogen, which requires green electricity to electrolyse the hydrogen by separating the hydrogen atom from H2O, then 40% of the energy in the electricity is lost. Therefore, such a car would get the equivalent of 39 MPG, which is what cars get already.

The problems with hydrogen are huge – it is very difficult to store, it is very difficult to distribute, it has to be made using fossil fuel (or made inefficiently using electricity), and the fuel cells use costly raw materials, they break easily and they degrade quickly. It is extremely unlikely we will ever have hydrogen fuel cell cars on the road in meaningful quantities.

The bottom line is this – as green energy, hydrogen is an electricity carrier. Hydrogen is only green if it is made from electricity (green electricity) using electrolysis, then converted back into electricity using a fuel cell. A better way to do this is via batteries. Even ultra-capacitors have a better chance of winning the electricity storage sweepstakes than hydrogen fuel cells. Read The Hydrogen Hoax for more information.

As reported today in a BBC story entitled “Study Hopeful for the World’s Forests,” a study done by researchers at the University of Helsinki has concluded that the actual biomass of the world’s forests is higher than previously thought. Here are some of the key findings:

The study measured biomass instead of just surface area of forests, and using this measurement determined forest biomass is increasing in 22 of the 50 most forested nations.

They found that when a nation’s per capita income exceeds $4,600 per year, their forest stocks begin to increase – for a variety of reasons including more job opportunities and better enforcement of forest management.

According to the U.N. Food & Agriculture Organization, there are 16.8 million square miles of forest per year, and they are being deforested at a rate of 13 million hectares per year, which translates into just over 50,000 square miles per year. This is only 3/10ths of one percent per year, which tends to confirm the data from Helsinki, which is rates of world deforestation are slowing down.

Nonetheless, considering the world’s forests used to occupy nearly 30 million square miles, and considering there is a one-to-one correlation between deforestation and increases in atmospheric CO2, we may wish to remain at least as concerned about deforestation (and reforestation) as we are about regulating carbon emissions.

Thanks almost exclusively to global warming concerns, the world’s biofuel industry is expanding rapidly. If biofuel begins to be produced on an industrial scale worldwide, expect pressures on the world’s forests to return with a vengence. Do we need forests more than we need biofuel?